I think some of Rictus' problems today stem from his initial implicit attack of fuzzmz and ThatPJ, when he said he was willing to listen to Ryvvn's arguments that one of those two was a Wolf.

Experienced players will realize that this is just prudent open-mindedness on his part, but newer players might misinterpret it as a willingness to vote for anyone but himself, which would of course be Wolfy.

If Rictus had simply asked Ryvvn to defend himself (i.e., just explain why Ryyvn was not a Wolf), then he might have been able to avoid alienating That PJ and fuzzmz.

I agree with Ozymandias here. Show conviction without locking your vote. Ryvvn never defended himself, backing off looks odd.

rekard wrote:When you go into the unknown, how certain are you? How do you know you are right?

After I correctly pen in one or two players as lock human through completely arbitrary tone-reading methods that nobody else is going to trust, I work off of probability. I can't be sure I'm right, but some affiliations are far more probable than others.

Hellheart, sometimes it won't be about logic, but about how players feel about you. You could turn into the Perfect Wolf Hunter, but it only takes one thought : "Why is he so perfect? He probably is a wolf" and BAM! you get lynched. At that moment, player perception is what will matter.

And this links to the above. I can point out situations where if I were a wolf, I would have voted differently. I can show that Ryvvn is the wolf through 3 different angles, all spoilered with completely independent threads of logic that arrive at the same conclusion - his voting in the past 3 days, uncharacteristic (for anyone) or absent emotions that are at odds with the content of his posts in the last 3 days culminating in a post with exclamation marks when fuzzmz is leading because he sees the win coming and can't help himself, and contrasting his posts in this final day to his posts in the final day in the Pratchett game (where he was human) and in the Lovers Game (where he was human).

I would tell people to pick whatever line of logic appeals to them the most since all three of them clearly show that Ryvvn is the last wolf. I'd say that I am absolutely convinced that he must be the wolf, and that anyone voting elsewhere has to either refute my argument, make a counter-argument that shows why my logic might be distorted, or admit that their choice has nothing to do with logic, probability, or game sense and they either don't have the time or the inclination to get any better at the game.

I'll soften that as much as I can without seeming like I'm unsure, but it'd still be somewhat overbearing and harsh. I'd also be completely willing to change tracks if someone actually did point out flaws.

rekard wrote:Aggressiveness has a potential of alienating people. Rictus tone can have that nature at least times.

And yeah Hellheart. Maybe even if you did all that, someone could think " You're doing too much effort to kill him" and lynch there it goes.

I completely agree. The stark harshness is what I'd use if I'm trying to convince Ozymandias, who would take that last part as a challenge and read through all three lines of logic. If I'm trying to convince Ryvvn (and the subject is someone other than Ryvvn), I remove the last part entirely and probably use the votes and the uncharacteristic posts spoilers by themselves - there's no reason to be harsh with him because when he's a human he's willing to try and he respects my reasoning enough to at least look through it. The major issue is that I'll default to harsher than I necessarily need to be when I'm dealing with a player that I'm unfamiliar with or that I haven't seen much reasoning from...because I simply don't know how to get through to them or whether I even can, the first step is to ensure that I at least got their attention for better or for worse.

And of course when it's outside of like F5 I can't specifically appeal to anyone without harming my own argument. Although I will start addressing smaller posts to a player that I have a strong human read on instead of stupidly trying to incorporate that into my general post.

I've abandoned the extensive wolf case style in the past few games entirely because it's just too much for players to read when there's a lot of people still left. The recent attempts I've made at making my arguments more concise make me want to try the full-wolf-case approach again. My read posts are way too disjointed at the moment and I think I'd do better by returning to what I know while still limiting both the scope and number of my analysis posts.

I do like where my posting is going. My volume hasn't changed much, but the majority of my posts are now either bantering, fluff, or interactions with other players to potentially get a human/wolf read.

Mwahaha. Even in death my words seed doubt. I think we all here are a bit biased by knowledge lenses. Being out there without knowing what's what, it can provide a confusing view. Also PJ is saying the scenario I hoped for a possible victory. It fits if you consider the possibility of a wolf caving to pressure.

If you apply that coating to a "wolf" Rictus, what he says makes sense. It's not the truth, but it's a possible scenario.

rekard wrote:Mwahaha. Even in death my words seed doubt. I think we all here are a bit biased by knowledge lenses. Being out there without knowing what's what, it can provide a confusing view. Also PJ is saying the scenario I hoped for a possible victory. It fits if you consider the possibility of a wolf caving to pressure.

If you apply that coating to a "wolf" Rictus, what he says makes sense. It's not the truth, but it's a possible scenario.

The "rictus is a wolf" argument simply doesn't hold water - yesterday Rictus could've EOD-switched to fuzzmz, the day prior Rictus could've joined Ryvvn on Blindsniper and you could've switched at EOD.

And then on Day 3, why would there be a pretty little spread between you and CAD and then a big red blob of Admetus and Rictus on Visigoth? Did the wolves decide to sacrifice two consecutive wolves since Rictus' tying vote is going to make either you or Rictus look hella wolfy? Did they somehow suddenly decide that Visigoth was the guy that should be lynched?

I just think there's way too much to explain. With Ryvvn, he casts early votes or he casts off-wagon votes when a human is clearly going to be lynched. Nothing needs to be explained.

The specific F5 thread post Rictus is referencing had to be done for metagame reasons - it wasn't Ryvvn trying to salvage human cred, it was Ryvvn doing exactly what human-Ryvvn would have done. HOWEVER, I think Ryvvn's F5 thread posts in the past couple days are VERY telling. That's an excited Ryvvn that can't post anywhere else. I would've thought it was odd enough to point out in the game thread were I still alive.

What Rictus needs is to persuade. Not just use the correct logic, but say it in a convincing way.

This is what I've spent the last 2 or 3 games working on almost exclusively. It's more a matter of practice than anything else. Everyone has an arguing method that appeals to them, it's just a matter of discovering what it is.

Hellheart, you are again assuming humans and wolves behave perfectly either ineptly or smartly.

It doesn't matter how convoluted it is. As long as the other person thinks "that makes sense", that's what matters in the end. Also you forget one little truth: players can panic.

I agree, but you have to understand that if we take what you're saying to the extreme, then I can't ever expect players to listen to logic and should solely make appeals to emotion unless I know exactly what they'll accept as reasoning. I know it won't always work, but I have to believe it'll work more often than not for it to be worth doing at all.

I'm moving back to full wolf-cases because I know that any given argument won't always work and I want alternate angles because something's going to stick. Honestly, I'd go right back to Day 8 as my strongest argument, where the content of human-Ryvvn's posts only make sense if he freaks out near EOD because he is clearly convinced that the humans will lose if CAD is lynched. He had some hedging in his posts, but that was pained hedging that he seemed to seriously doubt. Instead of freaking out, though, he makes a totally noncommittal "welp, hope you're right" with a neutral face. On lynch-or-lose. Yeah fucking right. And then that odd post with the exclamation points the following day because he couldn't contain his excitement.

And here his early posts were clearly disjointed - panic, as you said, and his analysis posts - if you can call them that - aren't very detailed. In both of his F3's as a human, he spent a long time on a strong, clearly articulated post that summarized how he felt. And then he voted. No sympathy plays beforehand, no appeals to the other players. "This is what I know and how I feel, this is my vote, take it as you will." THAT is human-Ryvvn. This is clearly not human-Ryvvn.

My PERSONAL opinion is that Ryvvn was trying to be honest about things, maybe cut him a little slack. He appears to have been looking out for the integrity of the game, which is admirable even though the move might have cost the wolves the game.

To future Ryvvn:

A lot of dead folk were telling Furin to not count your vote, either. Maybe in the future just PM the GM if you want to make that kind of statement, in order to keep nontroversies from turning in to controversies.

heh, what a game this turned out to be. I've been keeping an eye in here and in the day threads. Must be an exciting one for all those left alive.

Furin excellent game, had a brief but fun time for sure.

Good luck to everyone left, you have all worked hard and played exceptionally well to make it to that this point.

edit: that = this

For what it's worth, though, his talking to himself is awfully entertaining.-sphenYou're adorable-Ravehe is a master bullshitter so he could just take things out of his own ass or whatever comes from his mind to argue.-Rekard

Various times, humans have caught wolves for completely wrong reasons.

What Rictus needs is to persuade. Not just use the correct logic, but say it in a convincing way.

(this is mostly just an excuse to post another cat gif )

Edit: What I mean by the above image is that I agree with rekard. You don't always have to be right, you just have to seem right enough. If you are, someone might get blapped in the face for it, and that's always a good time.

Last edited by Simple_Simon on 06 Mar 2014, 16:39:50, edited 1 time in total.

For what it's worth, though, his talking to himself is awfully entertaining.-sphenYou're adorable-Ravehe is a master bullshitter so he could just take things out of his own ass or whatever comes from his mind to argue.-Rekard

Thanks. Actually that means a lot (really) because I do put a good deal of effort into my image based posts. I grew my cat gif folder for months in preparation for a game to use them. I have just under 100 or so of them so I can pick and chose them based on the emotion, or action I am attempting to display in that post. I can't be assed at the moment, but I'm pretty sure I did it with the Spider-Man meme pictures a while back too, with some degree of success.

Also the way I figure it, a chuckle is always a good thing 'round here

Edit: added cat gif

Last edited by Simple_Simon on 06 Mar 2014, 16:46:07, edited 2 times in total.

For what it's worth, though, his talking to himself is awfully entertaining.-sphenYou're adorable-Ravehe is a master bullshitter so he could just take things out of his own ass or whatever comes from his mind to argue.-Rekard

My PERSONAL opinion is that Ryvvn was trying to be honest about things, maybe cut him a little slack. He appears to have been looking out for the integrity of the game, which is admirable even though the move might have cost the wolves the game.

To future Ryvvn:

A lot of dead folk were telling Furin to not count your vote, either. Maybe in the future just PM the GM if you want to make that kind of statement, in order to keep nontroversies from turning in to controversies.

Just chiming in here (because I can't find the drnka thread) with a ++++++++

We've been taking a lot of liberties with the F5 thread. When I started, it was a place to post "F5F5F5F5F5F5" while you waited for the day to roll. Current players should really not be posting anything of substance to that thread, other than to remind the GM that we're all FUCKING WAITING ON YOU TO ROLL THE DAY THREAD, GODDAMMIT, you lazy sack of . . . cat. Now people start to bring up in-game stuff like "I didn't mean to offend anyone with that post" or "hey - check this." and it contributes to the undesireable meta-aspects of an ongoing game.

If you have a concern with how something is going in the current game, a PM to the GM is absolutely the right move. If the GM doesn't agree with you, then you bitch him out in the day thread (Hi, RaveBomb!)

But I also +++++ the point about: I don't think Ryvvn was being malicious, adding on, I don't think Rictus was accusing of such. My very first game, FurinMirado no-mauled on the day that Evil_Superman missed his vote, which introduced a meta-game doubt into my head, which pissed me off to no end. None of the players involved intentionally did anything to meta the game (at the time, I didn't realize the wolven benefits to no-mauling a 4:1 game to get to 3:1, and that bastard Furin didn't bother to explain it to me at the time), but it's there and it's in your head and OMGWTF.

IMHO, don't post off the game-thread unless you know you're absolutely certain that what you're posting is completely current-game-neutral. Even twdog's post today about fuzzmz-as-a-vampire was a bit too much for my personal taste - from the dead thread, it's HAHA! funny, but to Rictus, he's reading that and rereading that and analyzing why twdog punctuated it the exact way that he did and OMGWTF, and now Rictus is voting for fuzzmz, even though it may be entirely subconscious to him (probably not in this case - not screaming at you personally twdog, just a very convenient example of something I would not have done).

However in my defense I can't hardly tell the difference between Ryvvn and Rictus sometimes. Something about the two of them get's me all mixed up all the time. I'm sure that's a worse offense.

For what it's worth, though, his talking to himself is awfully entertaining.-sphenYou're adorable-Ravehe is a master bullshitter so he could just take things out of his own ass or whatever comes from his mind to argue.-Rekard

Simple_Simon wrote:However in my defense I can't hardly tell the difference between Ryvvn and Rictus sometimes. Something about the two of them get's me all mixed up all the time. I'm sure that's a worse offense.

It's Smirker and Stigmata for me. When I posted on the infamous Day 2 that I had to go check that I hadn't gotten them confused, I wasn't kidding.

Once again - great game to the wolves, there - and Ryvvn, very well done on not panicking (at least in the day thread) after you realized how bad that was (ditto for Admetus and his mispost, which I did not catch myself - but I thought it was ~a bit odd in the edited version).

Simple_Simon wrote:However in my defense I can't hardly tell the difference between Ryvvn and Rictus sometimes. Something about the two of them get's me all mixed up all the time. I'm sure that's a worse offense.

It's Smirker and Stigmata for me. When I posted on the infamous Day 2 that I had to go check that I hadn't gotten them confused, I wasn't kidding.

lol, I can safely assume we've all been there. I know for certain I have. That being said I've had much worse ...

I can't recall the exact game but there was a point where I had spent a good deal of time concocting some convoluted story about someone just about to post it and for whatever reason I had decided to double check the player list. Low and behold, that player wasn't even in that game.

For what it's worth, though, his talking to himself is awfully entertaining.-sphenYou're adorable-Ravehe is a master bullshitter so he could just take things out of his own ass or whatever comes from his mind to argue.-Rekard